A&H

PL Referees £s

You have just continulously ignored what people are saying and seem to be just trolling again.
MORE. PEOPLE. WOULD. TAKE. UP. THE. WHISTLE!!!!


Garbage and having experience on sitting in both association and league mertings, where I am, there is no link to increasing match fee to increasing number of referees

It of course might be different where you are.
 
The Referee Store
You don't come away with the same total, you come away with more.

In a 45 year career you'd only have to average about 30k to earn the same as a PL referee. The UK average male full-time salary is £39k so PL referees earn less than the average man, and the average man has job security, legal recourse, and his family don't get threatened.

It might also be true that men with higher earnings potential might also be more suited to the kinds of pressures elite level refereeing presents.



Show me someone from 20 to 65 on 30k per year.
 
Show me someone from 20 to 65 on 30k per year.



Oh and should a referee need specialist protection, they get it
You can also insure yourself and you have the best legal aid avail
Throw in all the sports science, analysis, pyschology,
Then ececutive travel, hotels
And the over riding personal satisfaction
Plus the opportunities post refereing, its not a bad number

Oh and bear in mind, its plausible the ref "works" for 90 mins per week
 
Gordon Taylor is the best-paid union official in the UK and, according to several reports, the world. Over the course of 2017, the PFA CEO pocketed an impressive £2.29 million!!!

Additionally, he gets a £41,250 car allowance, private medical cover worth around £9,000 and other benefits worth £2,800.

His counterpart in the Professional Cricketers’ Association, David Leatherdale, was paid £137,990 last year, while Damian Hopley, who is in charge of the Rugby Players’ Association, earned £134,430.

Further put into context, it is many times greater than the £530,000 that was paid out to players suffering from illness, injuries, mental health and addiction problems last year. This has proven to be the major condemnation of his reign, with critics pointing out that the union is failing to adequately protect its most vulnerable members.

Although footballers at the top level can earn stratospheric sums of money, many more down the pecking order are on a far more modest wage and can find themselves in significant financial hardship if they are touched by bad luck.

gordon-taylor-pfa_1wf8582jaknte1pcowkdw8liv1.jpg


The PFA has not responded to questions over the scale of Taylor’s pay packet, although the Guardian has reported that it is pegged to the level an average top-flight manager might earn.

During the 2016-17 tax year, he was given a bonus of £777,183, though again no answer was given by the PFA as to why this figure was so large, although the union did turn a profit of £27.9m.

Criticism aimed at Taylor’s wage is nothing new, with erstwhile Birmingham City chairman David Gold accusing him in 2002 of “building a mausoleum to greed”.

In 2001, he was forced to bat off critics, insisting: “I don’t see why I have to defend it. It is decided by the players as a salary for their union leader.”

Nine years later, he again came under the microscope, stating: “Why is it a problem if you get a good salary because you are a trade union leader as opposed to a captain of industry? Mine pales into insignificance compared to the bankers’.”

Taylor had an 18-year playing career, during which time he turned out for Bolton Wanderers, Birmingham City, Blackburn Rovers, Vancouver Whitecaps (on loan) and Bury.
 
Show me someone from 20 to 65 on 30k per year.

Most men average more than 30 a year over their 45 year career. At the moment the average of all men of all ages still working is £39k. That is actually slightly lower than the average over 45 years because not everyone makes it to 65.

So, the answer is "most men".
 
I don’t think just increasingly the remuneration of Elite referees will improve standards.

To improve standards you need to increase the pool of elite referees, and the pyramid below.

As I see it, at the very bottom of the pyramid, we get some beer money to pursue our hobby. Great.

But as you progress upwards, there inevitably comes a point we’re you need to make financial sacrifices to potentially push on to highest levels. These sacrifices will probably come in the form of reduced career options/working hours etc. Some will accept this as a worthwhile as they take the risk to try and reach their goal of becoming a professional referee, but for many it will be a risk they can’t take, so the supply of referees capable of becoming the best gets choked off.

So if there is more money for refs, if I was in charge I would use it to employ more full time refs rather than better pay those handful that have made it, I.e. smooth out the route to the top, rather than have a quantum leap from part timers to the professional elite.
 
I don’t think just increasingly the remuneration of Elite referees will improve standards.

To improve standards you need to increase the pool of elite referees, and the pyramid below.

As I see it, at the very bottom of the pyramid, we get some beer money to pursue our hobby. Great.

But as you progress upwards, there inevitably comes a point we’re you need to make financial sacrifices to potentially push on to highest levels. These sacrifices will probably come in the form of reduced career options/working hours etc. Some will accept this as a worthwhile as they take the risk to try and reach their goal of becoming a professional referee, but for many it will be a risk they can’t take, so the supply of referees capable of becoming the best gets choked off.

So if there is more money for refs, if I was in charge I would use it to employ more full time refs rather than better pay those handful that have made it, I.e. smooth out the route to the top, rather than have a quantum leap from part timers to the professional elite.
Great points RJ, Maybe it would attract the better potential top class referees that are able rather than just the available bunch!!! Maybe the extra dosh would encourage them to be more able and available!! :ninja:
 
It is a known fact that some referees turned down SG2 and SG1 because they had good careers and didn't want to give them up. That is fair enough, after all SG is only a one year contact and can be revoked at any time. Would any of those who turned it down have gone on to be top FIFA referees? Probably not, but you never know.

I never made it to that level, but I have a good job and even if I genuinely believed I had a chance of making the top level I don't think I would quit my job for the £30k ish that SG2 gets. SG1 is obviously more, but is it enough to give up your career? Been touched on above, but one of the justifications for high player wages is they have a limited career. Referees are no different, you won't be earning that wage until you retire at 68 so you need to earn much more in the years you are refereeing, which, except in exceptional circumstances, won't be much beyond 50. Take Mike Dean as an example, he will earn decent money now but he is coming towards the end. Who will employ him after 20+ years in refereeing? Realistically he is looking at a role in football, and he'll be lucky to get much more than £30k for that.

I don't think referees should earn anywhere near the money that players do. But I do think they should get more than they currently do, and I believe that top referees in Italy and Spain earn way more than their English colleagues do.
 
Another way to look at it, without touching on Brexit, but, it is relevant today..
Can anybody say for sure they be in their job this time next year?

And a epl ref say on 60k for 20 years...should really have enough to live on if retires at 55.....
 
Put the refs in bonus for reds and yellows! I could see lots of potential for guaranteed earnings. You could book holidays on refereeing Liverpool and City! 😂
 
80k times 20 is 1.6 million.
if you are seriously saying you would rather work 40 years at 40k a year (and come on, that would mean earning 40k from age 20 to 60, NOT HAPPENING), to come away with the same total, your deluded.
Don't forget tax. 80k becomes 40k.
 
It is a known fact that some referees turned down SG2 and SG1 because they had good careers and didn't want to give them up. That is fair enough, after all SG is only a one year contact and can be revoked at any time. Would any of those who turned it down have gone on to be top FIFA referees? Probably not, but you never know.

I never made it to that level, but I have a good job and even if I genuinely believed I had a chance of making the top level I don't think I would quit my job for the £30k ish that SG2 gets. SG1 is obviously more, but is it enough to give up your career? Been touched on above, but one of the justifications for high player wages is they have a limited career. Referees are no different, you won't be earning that wage until you retire at 68 so you need to earn much more in the years you are refereeing, which, except in exceptional circumstances, won't be much beyond 50. Take Mike Dean as an example, he will earn decent money now but he is coming towards the end. Who will employ him after 20+ years in refereeing? Realistically he is looking at a role in football, and he'll be lucky to get much more than £30k for that.

I don't think referees should earn anywhere near the money that players do. But I do think they should get more than they currently do, and I believe that top referees in Italy and Spain earn way more than their English colleagues do.
Good point. Many professionals would give full-time refereeing the red card because of the risk and (only) comparable salary. So we don't necessarily have the best officials, we just have the one's who were willing to take a short term contract
 
Another way to look at it, without touching on Brexit, but, it is relevant today..
Can anybody say for sure they be in their job this time next year?

And a epl ref say on 60k for 20 years...should really have enough to live on if retires at 55.....

How many SG1 referees have lasted 20 years and carried on until 55 … ?!

Your statement about being enough to retire on is just pure nonsense, I certainly hope you aren't a financial advisor. 60k gross is probably more like 36k after tax and NI, so that's £720k in that period. But you obviously spend a large percentage of that on mortgage, car, kids (if you have them), pension, insurance, holidays, eating and drinking, and just generally living.

Now, life expectancy is 80 for males in the UK these days, so if you retire at 55 that's at least 25 years you need to plan for, realistically more as apart from a recent blip it is getting older. Even if you only spent half of your take home pay, which for someone on £60k is highly unlikely, that leaves around £14.5k per year. Industry guidelines are that you should aim for a retirement pot of half to two thirds of your retirement salary, so in this case £30k to £45k, so you would be way short.

Very few, if any, people earning 60k per year will be able to retire at 55, and in all likelihood will end up working to or at least close to the retirement age which is now 68.

With regards to the job market, then no there are no guarantees any more, personally I've had to reapply for my job three times in the past two years. Had I not been successful and instead been made redundant I would have undoubtedly had much more chance of getting a new job in the same sector than someone who had been a professional referee for the past 20 years. "So Mr Dean, could you explain how your recent employment relates to this role you are applying for"? It is totally, totally different.
 
How many SG1 referees have lasted 20 years and carried on until 55 … ?!

Your statement about being enough to retire on is just pure nonsense, I certainly hope you aren't a financial advisor. 60k gross is probably more like 36k after tax and NI, so that's £720k in that period. But you obviously spend a large percentage of that on mortgage, car, kids (if you have them), pension, insurance, holidays, eating and drinking, and just generally living.

Now, life expectancy is 80 for males in the UK these days, so if you retire at 55 that's at least 25 years you need to plan for, realistically more as apart from a recent blip it is getting older. Even if you only spent half of your take home pay, which for someone on £60k is highly unlikely, that leaves around £14.5k per year. Industry guidelines are that you should aim for a retirement pot of half to two thirds of your retirement salary, so in this case £30k to £45k, so you would be way short.

Very few, if any, people earning 60k per year will be able to retire at 55, and in all likelihood will end up working to or at least close to the retirement age which is now 68.

With regards to the job market, then no there are no guarantees any more, personally I've had to reapply for my job three times in the past two years. Had I not been successful and instead been made redundant I would have undoubtedly had much more chance of getting a new job in the same sector than someone who had been a professional referee for the past 20 years. "So Mr Dean, could you explain how your recent employment relates to this role you are applying for"? It is totally, totally different.



A lot depends on how modest and sensible you are too though.
I could manage on 60k over a 10 year period.

Bear in mind, my own example, I stay in whats described as a deprived area, so, might be different elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
I defy anybody reading this to say, if offered, they would not be a premiership ref for 50k
I wouldn't. I would want 5x that to cover loss of earnings and 'risk' that being in a less secure contract involves.

I've already told myself I'm not interested in going beyond L3 as being a 2b involves so much more travel and time that doesn't work with my job. If I had to give up that job, it'd need to be worthwhile.

To the point being made by others, this is the reason why more pay means better referees in the long term, as it attracts and retains talent that otherwise would go elsewhere.
 
Back
Top